Nobody every says not to send a parcel at Christmas because the trucker shipping the it will have to stop and refuel - yet that is what is happening at the moment when people discuss in-space rocket refueling, especially in regard to the effectiveness of the SpaceX Starship.
Just because it's new doesn't mean it's wrong.
Sure, it has never been done before, and there are dangers as rocket fuels tend to be very volatile. That does not mean it's a bad idea.
The problem with this thinking is that we have never needed to do it before. There have never been plans in the past to move so much mass around in space, or send it such distances.
If all we ever wanted to do was take stuff to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) or even the moon, then we would never need to refuel in space.
But that's like saying I have a petrol pump at home so I will only ever go as far as I can and still make it back home to refuel. This works for some things but definitely limits your options on where you can go.
Space travel is changing. We are advancing from our short space hops from Earth to much longer trips - and for this we need infrastructure in space.
Elon Musk talks about SpaceX as the railroad of space and railroads, like highways, need infrastructure - part of which is the ability for trains, trucks, and cars to refuel. Space is no different.
In-space refueling is just the first part of the infrastructure needed to increase space activity, becoming a key part of our outward journey into space.
These words spoken by John F. Kennedy could just as well apply to what is currently needed in space:
"Our nation’s progress depends on the arteries of transportation and communication which bind our country together."
In the next article, we’ll explore why Starship needs refueling when others don't.
